5o 
SCIENCE. 
The lines represent what may be called the Jissural 
integers, and only those junctions are shown which, 
so far as I know, are constant in the cat. These are 
of the rhinal with the postrhinal, and of the sylvian 
with the point of their union ; of the superorbital with 
the rhinal ; of the callosal with the hippocampal, and 
with the preradical when it exists. . 
1 'he following junctions I have never observed : Of 
the splenial with the postrhinal ; of the splenial with 
the cruciate, which Guillot has seen once, and Krueg 
twice. Neither have I seen the union of the anterior 
and posterior fissures to form the “ first or lowest 
arched fissure ” of the Canidae. On the contrary, as 
stated by Krueg (2,613), and by myself (11,229), 
this union sometimes fails with domestic dogs ; hence, 
in this as in many other respects, the cat presents 
less tendency to vary. 
The following junctions are common : Of the 
diagonal with the anterior ; of the postsylvian with the 
supersylvian ; of the medilateral with the lunate, and 
with the lateral or the confinis ; of the marginal with 
the post marginal ; and of the ansate with the lateral 
or coronal or both. 
A junction is usually marked by a less depth of the 
compound fissure at that point, constituting a con- 
cealed “transition convolution” or “pli de passage,” 
which may be seen by separating the sides or by 
slicing off the cortex. 
The fissura ansata is represented by me as a slightly 
curved line nearly at right angles with the lateral and 
coronal, and rather nearer the former. It is true, as 
stated by Krueg, that the apparent form of the fissure 
is usually triradiate ; but the variations are so great 
that no single figure would fairly represent them all, 
and in two brains I have found the condition of things 
shown in the figure. This fissure demands fuller in- 
vestigation, especially with reference to its representa- 
tion in the human brain. 
The sylvian fissure in the cat does not present the 
complexity observed by Krueg in some dogs and in 
Ungulata, and the “ Insula” is not distinguishable. 
My paper will contain a synonymy of the fissures of 
the cat’s brain, with full references to the page and 
figure upon which a fissure is named or represented. 
In some cases there are 25 entries under a single 
head, and I trust the lists may aid others in the identi- 
fication of the fissures as described by different 
authors. 
ABRIDGED SYNONYMY OF THE CEREBRAL FISSURES OF THE DOMESTIC CAT. 
Ahbrev. 
Flowers 1869. 
Leuret^ 1839. 
Huxley , 1861, 1872. 
Chven , 1868. 
Wilder , 1873. 
Krueg , 1880. 
Adopted in the present 
paper. 
Ansata 
Ansata 
An. 
A. 
Ant. branch of ectosyl- 
Ant. upright of ectosylvian. . 
Anterior 
A. 
Callosal 
Callosalis 
C. 
Confinis 
Confinis 
Ct. 
Coronalis 
Coronalis 
Co. 
Cruciata 
Cruciata 
Cr. 
Diagonalis 
Diagonalis 
Di. 
T?1 1 
Genuahs 
Falcialis 
FI. 
H 
Hippocampal. Den- 
fate, H., 1861 
Hippocampi 
Hippocampalis. 
H. 
I 
Lateral 
Lateralis 
Lateralis 
L. 
I u 
Lunata 
Lit. 
Ml 
Medilateralis 
Medilateralis. . . 
Ml. 
M r 
Marginal 
Suprasplenialis 
Marginalis 
Mr. 
Ol 
Olfactoria 
Olfactoria 
Ol. 
Postcruciata 
Postcruciata . . . 
Per. 
P 
Post, branch of ectosy.'- 
Postica 
Postica 
P. 
Postsplenialis 
Postmarginahs. 
Pmr. 
Prd 
Postradicalis. . . 
Prd. 
Pr 
Rhinalis post 
Postrhinalis. . . . 
Pr. 
Ps 
Suprasylvii post 
Postsylviana . . . 
Ps. 
PrrH 
Preradicalis. . . . 
Prrd. 
P 
Rhinalis 
Rhinalis 
R. 
Sfl 
Part of falcial 
Rostralis 
Subfalcialis .... 
Sfl. 
Sp 
Callosomarginalis, 
Splenialis 
Sp. 
(FI & H) 
Splenialis 
Supraorbital, (FI) . . 
Prsesylvii 
Superorbitalis. . 
So. 
Supersylvian 
Postsylvian & supersylvian. 
Suprasylvii 
Supersylvian a. . 
Ss. 
S 
Sylvii 
Sylviana 
S. 
In 
Intermedia .... 
In. 
The foregoing is an abridgement of this synonomy 
limited to writers who have made special additions to 
the technical nomenclature, and excluding those who 
have employed phrases or vernacular names, or who 
have adopted the names of other writers in purely 
physiological papers. Notwithstanding the impor- 
tance of the contributions of Flower, Huxley and 
Leuret, the technical names employed by them are so 
few that they may be given in a single column. It is 
due to Krueg to state that several of the names now 
given had been already used in his paper on the Un- 
gulata, in which he included a diagram of a dog’s 
brain. 
The principles of anatomical nomenclature are 
hardly identical with those of taxonomy, but it seems 
right that priority should prevail excepting when the 
name implies an incorrect or doubtful homology, or 
is practically very objectionable. Hence, Owen’s 
“ Postsylvian ” should not be displaced by Krueg’s 
“ Suprasylvi posterior,” or his “ marginal,” by “ su- 
